these scurrilous allegations and reaffirm our commitment to be the greenest government ever? >> shall i first of all congratulate the honorable lady in her new role. in the treasury she has every ability to make sure this government delivers on its green commitment but what i would say to her and all right honorable is this government that is set off a green investment bank with three billion pounds to spain, it is this government that has committedgreen carbon storage. we are putting money into you vehicles. we are the first government with a carbon floor price. these aren't all steps to avert -- these are all steps of a government committed to a green agenda.

>> the chairman of the conservative party said if the money was stolen it will be returned. now does the prime minister agree with his former treasurer that is tainted money and they have a duty to give it back? >> i have not seen the evidence for that, but what i say to the hon. gentleman is what about the 12 billion pounds his party has taken from the trade unions to bring this country to its knees. >> order, the house must come down. >> can the prime minister assure me that steps are taken it will

be a public consultation and the establishment of an independent body so violence is never compromised now? >> all frakking violations have been suspended. the royal academy of engineering and the royal society produced a full independent review into the risks of tracking -- fracking. they would have to meet stringent standards. now it would have to fit within our overall energy commitment. >> you have been watching prime minister's questions. -- primeister's time minister's question airs live at 7:00 a.m. eastern. over the next few weeks, members

of the house of commons will attend their party conferences. the house returns on october 17. you can find video of past questions and other british affairs programs at our web site at c-span.org. >> i think the fourth amendment can be construed to be of privacy amendment, search and seizure in your home without due thinkss, and i strongly favo the privacy are founders took for granted in the telecommunications age you cannot take for granted, and we have a legislature to make it happen, but the short answer is i feel very strongly the information about yourself is yours unless there is a law

enforcement or an overwhelmingly public good reason to go round about privacy screen. >> the question of technology and privacy with congressman joe barton monday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 2. and less than three weeks, the first of the presidential debates on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. next european parliament debate and then william bennett, and then q&a. members of the russian content was the riots -- punk band pussy riot were recently sentenced to jail. the russian prime minister medvedev nas spoke out in

support of the band members release and added that he did not agree with the response. next the response of russia's judicial system and the future with the eu members of the european parliament passed a resolution commending russia's judicial system. this is 35 minutes. >> during the last exchange we had we shared our concerns and about the violence against demonstrators. we welcomed at the same time the russian civil society, and we saw the russian civil society

ready to engage in battle with the government and to play an active role in the development of political institutions with the country. we sought dialogue between government and citizens. we have encouraged vladimir putin to pursue economic reform. we also offered our support in the shared organization's agenda. there have been some important developments. let me mention who world trade organization on the 22nd of august. russia took a major step forward in ongoing integration. we strongly support of that process and expect russia to fully implement all of the related agreements and to reach maximum benefit of the world

trade organization. there has been some encouraging initial results to further institutions, the easing of party registration rules, as well as direct elections of regional government. however, these have been only reforms so far, and to allow for a pluralistic parliamentary system without undue obstacles. much more needs to be done. we encouraged who'd been to engage in constructive dialogue, to find the best way forward an insurer a good way it -- and insure a good way forward. we have seen more intolerance of any expression. it is a -- instead of stronger

safeguards, we have seen a string of measures that chip away at them. it went at unusual speed before the summer recess. the common aid seems to be to further reduce the available space that can suspend political activity in the country. immediately after the inauguration, a number of leaders and activists who organized and participated in the sixth of may demonstrations were arrested and fired. many face charges. soon after the eighth of june, vladimir putin hyde amendment effectively limiting the administration. i stressed the government should include new legislation, and guarantee freedom of assembly for citizens. i also cautioned strong measures

to curtail this were likely to prove unproductive. a few weeks later they present foreign aid for all of the activities. given the history, foreign funding is not intended to challenge recipients. i reiterate my serious concern over the developments as well the situation in russia. these institutions are important. they are key to russia. they should be able to work freely and have the means to do it. we have supported some ngos and will continue to offer support

to their contribution to russia. we do so because the european union has a strong interest in a stable and democratic russia, and we have been offering our support to those who share this goal, but we need to impose our objectives on these russian organizations, nor do we aim to control their activities. in no way to these organizations become hours or anyone else's agents. let me state that clearly. get all of russia ngos would undoubtedly prefer to receive a russian funding, but there is barely any funding available for activities that could be perceived as critical of the authorities, nor do many businessmen offer support. i will not go into the details. good the key issue is how they

will be interpreted and applied, and we will pay attention to that, but most recently on the 17th of august, three young women were sentenced to two years in prison each for a peaceful less than one minute long performance. we understand this provocative stunt her religious -- hurt religious freedom. it should have been sanctioned as a minor offense. on the same day i issued a statement about my deep disappointment with a disproportionate reaction and recall of russia's commitment to respect obligations to ensure fair, transparent, an independent legal process. the irregularities to the trial have been reported, including conditions of pre-trial

detention. the package of legislation limiting freedom of assembly, restricting ngos, the plessy and thet case, sentencing, the dismissal of a deputy, and a continued lack of progress on the case -- this constitutes a trend of great concern to us. the trend raises serious questions on the state of the rule of law and in particular the use of law enforcement structures and other instruments of political purposes which should be used to safeguard the rights of freedom for citizens of russia. in conclusion, i want to stay the importance of having an economically successful russia at the border of the european union. russia is sometimes a challenging neighbor, but it

remains an important partner in many issues and many fields, and we remain ready to work with russia on positive reform efforts, to work constantly together on modernization, the integration of the rules based system, the development of citizens' rights and freedom has to be the basis of stability and prosperity, and we will continue to work with the government administration on these roles, but we should not shy away from our responsibility to express our concern with recent developments. we worry that the government set the country on the wrong path and wasted opportunity for modernization. i would like to thank the european parliament for working with me on services for both of these trials. let me take my opportunity to express my gratitude to parliament for your strong support of civil side -- civil society cooperation, including

financially. >> thank you very much. let's now move on to the of the group.ehalf now for a minute and a half. >> every word which you have said has my full agreement and has been in the negotiation today. on both sides we are critical of the anti-democratic developments in russia, and we know the country has never had a genuine democracy. we know this is a learning process they have got to go through, but they might have thought with the advent of president medvedev, things were going in the right direction,

but things have veered in the other direction, and we would modernizationpou and new -- agree with you this means moving forward as well. it is not just europeans that and see things moving in the wrong direction. the russians themselves are aware of that. the other week we were in russia with the eu delegation, and we talk with civil society. we were able to discuss all the legislation which you mentioned today. there is broadis interpretation, but civil society never knows where they stand. it means proper function of civil society is impossible because they do not know where

they are on firm grounds and what the rules are, and this is the question. what can we do together to ensure the rule of law is respected because of some major modernization and now? >> thank you very much. taiex let me say on behalf of democrats that we are -- >> let me say on behalf of democrats we are interested in a socially strong russia based on the principles of human rights, civil rights, rule of law. this was mentioned by gorbachev. he knew we could move russia forward only if they mobilize the free will of the people, and this energy of the russian people has to be based on

observation of human rights, civil rights, rule of law, so we are all very distressed with the situation developing since may, not only with the sentencing of the rock event but also with cases like a freely elected deputy of his mandate. the same applies to him. we the socialists and democrats want a dialogue with russia. russia is also a member of oaecc.e it is in our interest to develop a dialogue not only on the partnership, economic cooperation, but also as far as

human and civil rights are concerned. it is not only in our interest. it is in russian interest, because without it, and the russian society, the russian state cannot develop. thank you. >> thank you perry much. thank you, a share. dear colleagues, civil society and knows they can count on us. revolutions are one thing, but our words and not to protect who development in russia who -- but are words enough to protect development in russia. they have not kept their promise to actually move forward. now we are faced with a dilemma. should we continue to use the

same strategy by speaking and making declarations without accompanying are gestures with something more concrete? we are faced with-tensions and now of three -- the detention of pussy riot. i think the response underscore s how draconian the russian measures that have been taken really are. this is what goes on with the kremlin. do not take account with russian civil society. for the new generation, i think the words we express our not enough. we need to do something more concrete, some type of proof for all of those aspiring for

freedom in russia. we need to encourage proper legal measures to be taken. what has been done is targeting all of those who abuse human rights. russian civil society needs this. we need to act now. we need to support freedom for russia. you very much, and all right, mr. schulz. >> five months after putin forced himself back into power, relations between the eu and russia have arrived at an important point. we need to take stock honestly. we should not pretend anymore. we tried to get a strategic partnership.

we have not achieved it. we are a long way from a strategic partnership. our policies are really showing failure, and when it comes and who to syria, we do not follow the same values, and the autocracy is close to kremlin , and theiberal west commo eurasian union has no psychological basis. this is no more than a declaration of intention, and the government does not show any sign of wanting to modernize. the rules that have been adopted recently are rejected by the people. these are very badly drafted, and it is opening thoreau's to this behavior, and it is shown

by this. it is a question looking at the political behavior of the regime and whether that is something that serve the people. russia is not on the path to democracy it. it is moving and the other direction. the moment the kremlin sees our attempt to get modernization of an attempt to carry on having good friendship with them, but we have to take a close look at our relations with russia of. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. this afternoon you have had many critical words against russia, georgia, and syria. however, in your remarks, there

were reproaches with regard to the internal situation in russia. you talk about the problematic new law, which is a constraint on human rights. you know the situation of the woman arrested for allegedly possession of narcotics substances commonly and we know that there are developments in that case as well. only four hours ago, negotiations ended successfully because there was general agreement around parliament across the groups, and that will strengthen your hand and give you a stronger mandate. >> thank you very much. one minute.

>> the system of justice in russia seems to be a perfect instrument for the russian authorities to hammer down on the opposition and really quash it. what of those who killed them? there is a worrying issue relating to the organization of the n.g.o., which monitors elections. they were fined 13,000 rubles. also, we have heard the supreme court in russia has given itself powers, which means it can run counter to the rulings of the

international tribunal, the international court, and we can only put the rulings within the context of this totalitarian justice system in the kremlin. >> thank you, chairman. ladies and gentlemen, i do not intend to contradict assertions. i just want to present an example for comparison and reflection in the czech republic recently. an ordinary citizen, a bus driver was sentenced and imprisoned because of a sign of the attached the insect and

cannot now to the faces of some politicians on the pre-election campaign posters. it is interesting to note to this person was sentenced. he paid deleaded material damage, and this happened in one member state. similar cases could happen in other states of that a year -- of the eu. \ we should look at the situation in our countries. >> one-and-a-half minutes a. >> thank you for a much, president. wto willjoining of the intensify economic ties between russia and the west and the european union in particular.

we in the european parliament and in europe and more russian citizens are hoping for something different from the present situation what our expectations when it comes to relations between europe and russia? we have the right to have relations based on more democratic approach. we would like to see more service since freed when independent rights recognized in russia, -- to see more independent rights recognized in russia. aid is interesting the new constraint to freedom that we see it and the freedom of movement of ngos and constraints

on who internet activities for the sentencing shows how things are going badly, how the situation is turning sour, and these cases are still unresolved, so it is time to talk about human rights in russia. it is time to analyze the case. >> one minute. >> i should like to focus on two. . perhaps i do not look at it, but i am not a fan of punk music. we all know what pussy riot is, and perhaps differently from lady astor and we could talk about how this is civil or whether this is something that has deeply affected the interest

of the people. i think two years ago we were all agreed on what is happening, but i think what we were worried about and what the russian should be concerned about is that it is clear this legal case is one which shows political pressure on the justice system, and this is not acceptable. secondly, this is n.g.o. law was drafted in a way to be drafted as it has been used. we need something a lot clearer, and i think the law should be put where it belongs. there is one thing you cannot tell me, and that is we have to look at everything and do things together with russia. i am firmly convinced we

discussed this issue with russian colleagues, and this is the only reasonable approach to continue to discuss issues in order to move things. i am not one who believes that the discussion of resolution if only 3% of european union's is the best way to get success. thank you very much. but we are saying that russian society is awakening. what is the sleep is the government in most of the eu member states. that is why she is asked for a crisp and clear analysis.

many names that have been mentioned today. i think muslim rights have said quite clearly that this is the quintessence, that they should respect got more than putin. they don't want a pseudo rule of law by grace of putin. and mr. shultz is quite right. the policy of appeasement will end up as an e you really sincere by grace of putin.

yes, we have to talk with russia, but not in the way that has been described. we have to speak in a clear language. the european parliament has always taught in plain language on human rights. and we cannot look the other way and talk firmly. >> a blue card for you. are you ready to accept the blue card? >> you don't fix up to? >> oh, yes, he does accept appeared don't you also believe that the success of the clear language of the parliament also leaves something to be desired? we have not been clear enough. we need to work together. we need to develop projects

together. we also need to use a clearer language in hopes that something will move. secondly, would you be of the belief of the catholics -- if you had had this have been in your cathedral, perhaps to have been shown a lack of taste the their, what you just said. secondly, we have a different political system here in europe and i really don't understand when people see this very brave protest, which is a cry for help, and then people talk it down. for example, a member says it you have a neighboring country that puts things on the set of putin, there the european union shows questionable credibility.

we should not allow our credibility to be weakened. >> the legal system in russia has deteriorated considerably. we're talking not just about the case of these three women from this rock group, but it is nearing the state in which the legal system has found itself. of course, change is necessary and really need to make it crystal clear that we are aware of what is going on. it is something of which could and should be ashamed. these three women who have been sentenced to three years in prison have already been in

detention for six months and we really do need to be thinking whether we should describe this as a crime. if we go back to check history, when it was a communist state, i'm not sure that it would have been such a political misuse of the system. i think we need to be crystal clear about this and we need to get the message through that we don't accept this. >> i am encouraged by your clear message in this sad situation. since mr. putin has started his third presidency, the human rights situation is deteriorating. now the question remains, what

has to be done? until you -- until we continue to express our disappointments, i think it is time to express with a warning that there can be no further progress in our relations. the first unjustified step is to establish an e you, unless the russian officials who are responsible for the death of sergei and responsible for complete political repression. only then, i think, something will begin to change. it is up to us to act or just to react.

>> thank you very much. and now mr. murphy has the floor. >> since the jailing of the three women from pussy riot to prison for three years is an absolute scandal. it demonstrates the fear that the regime has not only of pussy riot but also of the protests against the election rigging. all of the promises made to the people of russia since the collapse of stalinism have been absolutely false. the benefits of growth have grown only to the oligarchs well working people suffer. they were promised democracy. they got only rig elections and the absence of any real democratic rights, the right to freedom of speech, the right to protest. in the closing statement of the

trial, one of the members of pussy riot added this up accurately. wthe whole world now sees that the criminal case against us has been fabricated in this system cannot conceal the repressive nature of this trial. thank you. >> thank you very much, mr. murphy. >> thank you, mr. president. and thank you to all the members of this house who have contributed to this very important debate. i think the views of members have been coherent and consistent in saying to three things with which i agree. first of all, we need to step up our work with civil society. in russia.

and to be as supportive as possible of all those who seek democratic future for their country and to be clear to of the importance of russia in terms of how we work with russia in all our activities across the world. i have already pointed to examples of that. but i would again say that russia is an important and key partner with us in trying to address the nature of the nuclear program of iran and i do not wish the other members to be under any other religion other than that russia plays a very important role in that. we have to do more to push forward on this. it is important. it is an area of work, both in terms of economic and in terms of political life, where we can do something. but the concerns that have been raised have been well said and the concerns of individual concerns coming terms of the

basis of this debate, the political use of justice, have been noted and we thank you for your support for what we're doing. and i look forward to continuing to work with you on this. >> monday, robert gates and mike mullen discuss the impact of the u.s. debt on national security. other speakers include erskine bowles and alan simpson, both shares of president obama's debt reduction commission. it is live beginning at 12:30 p.m. eastern on c-span 2. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] now a conversation with former education secretary bill bennett, now an author and radio talk-show host. he was a guest on today's " washington journal." this is just over 45 minutes.

we want to welcome bill bennett, former education secretary. we want to talk to you about education and friday, the forum introducing your former employee, intern, now the vice president nominee of paul ryan. when did you first meet paul ryan? guest: i met him at power america, hired by ben webber, former -- it was vin webber, jack kemp, and we were the partners of partner of america and paul ryan was hired as speech writer and staff assistant to jack kemp and also when i needed help. host: do you think he has helped the ticket? guest: yes i do. one thing that he has done that's quite remarkable is he has made the whole debate about medicare a fair debate and a debate which republicans can win. as you know he often says we can win this debate. i don't think anybody thought republicans would have a shot at this debate before paul ryan went in.

it's also very interesting, steve, to see the kind of grades he's getting from older americans. and that is a surprise to the media. by paul is smart, he's very persuasive. i think in the next two months he'll be even more of 26 a percentage gain for republicans. host: you look at the latest polls, the president up 11 points in pennsylvania, and the nbc news maris poll has the president winning ohio, florida and virginia. if that happens there's no way mitt romney can win this election. guest: i think that's probably right and i think it's uphill for mitt romney. there's a lot to tap in the last few weeks and i think when it's digested and thought about, if it is thought about, romney still has a very good chance but it's definitely uphill. guest: in the weekly standard, bill crystal says if it's time to panic, it's time to panic about the prospect of four more years of barack obama as president and the weekly from the -- message from the weekly standard is simple, explain how ghastly the prospect of

four more years of president obama really is and explain the course after romney-ryan administration that will follow and how the new polices will lead to a national recovery. what he has been saying is mitt romney has not been doing that. guest: well he's been doing it some. mitt romney is criticized -- remember when he put out the 59 points, they said this is too many points, too specific, now he's criticized for not being specific maybe something in the middle like goldilocks and the porridge, not too hot, not too cold, maybe 10 points. he certainly needs to stay on offense. the debate is very important for him. one of the things in the past week has been the emergence of foreign policy as an issue. i think this is a strong place for mitt romney to go. i thought the statement that he made was proper and correct. host: in fact you read the entire statement on friday, why? guest: i did because i wanted the audience to know exactly

what he said and see what their reaction was. it was obviously very positive. that's what he said when he said it was disgraceful, what the president did in response, to blame the filmmaker for what was happening all over -- well, not all over then, but in several countries in the middle east and now all over. in, what, 20 countries now. and it strikes me as somewhat bizarre that people do not see how clearly this is a weakness for barack obama, that they have not articulated a defensible position on these issues. this was the president who went to cairo, ironically, to say there would be a new understanding and there's not a new understanding. in fact people think less of us than they used to the bush administration. host let me ask you about your former boss ronald reagan, in april of 1980 when he was running for president, the failed mission that resulted in u.s. forces being killed as they were trying to capture the hostages being held in iran. and ronald reagan as a candidate issued a statement

that said it's time for national unity, he waited six days before he then delivered a speech critical of the carter administration and his polices. in terms of the timing of the romney statement, should he have waited? guest: no, i don't think you have to wait when the situation -- it's a very different situation than what ronald reagan was looking at. what he said was it was wrong to blame the wrong people and he was absolutely right about that. in terms of the particular negotiations that might take place, reagan backed off from that. but as you know, he took a very strong position on what the administration was doing. as events have unfolded, i think it's been clear that romney was right and this administration was not. and i think situations -- the situation is going to get worse over there, and one still waits for this administration to explain to us just exactly how some ridiculous little film like this inflames the entire world. it doesn't cohere, doesn't

make sense. what i think is they sensed the united states withdrawing, being weak, the united states not reacting with strength, with the way it should, and i think that's a recipe for disaster in the future. host: dan balls in the "washington post" saying it's time for romney to spell out his agenda. what does he need to do? guest: i think he could be more specific about what he wants to do. he said last week he had an economic plan, that would not decrease taxes on the wealthy, would not increase taxes on anyone, he could be more specific about that, i think. but i think the real case that he has to make is what happens if we have four more years, can we stand four more years of this. i think, my view is the country is being wrecked, that we are going downhill. maybe the most important statistic is not the economic stuff, which you hear endlessly about, unemployment and middle class family income and so on, but national morale, 57 percent of americans think we're in decline as a country and as a civilization. that's pathetic.

this is what's happened to morale, our sense of selves if they want more they can elect barack obama. host: loreen says it's time to shut down the republican party and this from the associated press, why aren't you winning, republican acti vies are incredulous, why can't republican mitt romney seem to break open a height race with the president given the nation's sluggish economy and enthusiasm to beat the democrats. guest: i don't blame mitt romney. he's not a great candidate, he's not a natural in the way that ronald reagan was a natural, in the way that bill clinton was a natural and in the way that barack obama was a natural. he's not that kind of political horseflash. he's a good candidate. i think he would be a very good president. but he's articulated a clear view about who he is and the differences with the president.

i think we may want to put responsibility in a democracy on the american people, you know, and if the american people vote this guy back into office they will be punished and many will serve that punishment if this is what they decide to do. but it's really up to them, isn't it, and i know a lot of people who look at the current situation and say well, he's doing pretty well. the heck he is. he's not doing well at all. i think people need to come to a recognition that this is their country, their future, their kids' future, do they want four more years of this, do they want to double down on this administration. host: you've heard the charge, you're not part of the media but many say in the mainstream media, in the tank for barack obama, there is a liberal agenda, a leftist agenda favoring the president in this campaign. guest: there isn't any question about it. there hasn't been a question about it for a long time. one piece of evidence is the surveys of the media, not of the mainstream media, where they were asked who they voted for and if you hear conversations and go to cocktail parties and events around washington you can

tell where people are. i know i often hear from people who know i was the secretary of education, know i write books and they say you're a thoughtful person or at least a sometimes thoughtful person, you're not like one of the tea party people or the conservative, right wing people and i say no, i am one of those conservative people. so you can read the bias pretty clearly. this is the way journalism schools work, this is the way the reward system works. it's very similar to what goes on in higher education. you bring into the fold people who are of your view and promote them that way. host: the news of the day from "the washington post" and striking chicago teachers holding a rally t's. appears as if this will be settled today, a vote scheduled later in the day and if that happens teachers could be back on the job tomorrow. the last strike was in 1987, the education secretary at the time -- guest: it was i. i would -- if i said it was me that would be a problem. it was i, secretary of education.

i had called the chicago public schools the worst schools in the country, a spokesman from the mayor's office at the time stood you said and said we're not the worst schools in the country, detroit is the worst schools in the country, i said good for you, don't be guilty of low aspirations. i must say chicago has made progress, it's probably now the fourth worst school district in the country. i say this a big ironically. host: what are the problems? spell out the problems for the city. guest: the main problem, of course, is the condition of kids in inner cities in america. and i don't blame teachers for that. that is they are getting a lot of kids who do not have parental interest, parental involvement, a lot of kids from single parent homes. look, the singlemost important fact for the american future is 40 percent of our kids are born out of wedlock. this makes a difference in life, this makes a difference in society. so a lot of the kids that teachers and schools have to work with come to them less than ready for school, and what can they count on after

school? some kids find, other kids know, it's not so good. so understand that the material they're getting isn't all potential rhodes scholars, we understand that. nevertheless we expect our teachers to do their best and do better than they're doing and here's the remarkable thing. there are schools that take such children rand do very well by them, teach them, improve them, they learn to read and write and count and think. the educational research now is clear, and i think this is the heart of the matter, steve, it's been done by the milken family foundation, los angeles and in other places, if you take a child in the third grade at the middle level in the 50th percentile, math and reading, and give him an excellent teacher, in two years that child will be at the 80th percentile, if you give that child a poor teacher, that child in two years will be at the 20th percentile. what more do we need to know? but that good teachers make a huge difference in the life of a child.

not all the difference. not everything. most important person in the child's life is a parent, obviously. but if you can move from the 50th to the 80th with a teacher or 50 to 20 with a poor teacher you've got to pay attention to the quality of the teaching force. the true evaluation isn't just about improving teachers. it's also about identifying who are the ones who should be promoted, rewarded, given more opportunity, given more responsibility, and encouraging out 69 profession people who are -- out of the profession people who are harming kids. host: how do you do that fairly? guest: you do it fairly through a number of monies and people with be -- can be open minded about this. i visited about 150 schools when i was secretary and i've now visited probably more than 600 schools. there is not a single school that i have been in, where if you go into the teacher room, faculty room and say to the teachers who's the best teacher here, who's the really great teacher in english or math or the -- where the teachers turn and say we have no idea, there's

no way to tell. there's no way to evaluate it. it's ridiculous. it's like going into a hospital or a newsroom or a football team, any place else, everybody knows who the great teachers are but we get into this notion that it's impossible to figure out. one of the beats in chicago is they're using standardized tests as part of the measurement for evaluating teachers. you should use standardized tests as part of the evaluation. you should also use other things like the assessment of other teachers. see if you said to teachers it seems to me as a group there, are big raises in this, there are big opportunities in this for all of you if you will clean up your own house, clean up your own act, discipline the people or encourage out of the profession people who don't belong in it and encourage rewards for the people who are excellent, i think what we -- we could do that, a rational system would do that, it would take into account what kids are

scoring, what parents think and what other teachers think. host: politics and education with our guest bill bennett, former education secretary, radio talk show host and author of how many books? guest:host: jane is on the phone from cleveland, ohio. caller: mr. bennett, they tell us that social security and medicare are in trouble. i just wonder what you think if teachers and firefighters and policemen were -- would pay into it, they say they want a dollar of increase for every $10 of cuts. well, before they start cutting social security, don't you think everybody should pay into it? a lot of americans don't have 36 the benefits and the pensions that these teachers and all the public employees have. all we're going to get is social security. i think it would be best to help the system if everybody paid into it. what do you think? guest: well it certainly would bring more funds in. i lot -- a lot of people don't realize it, the caller

is right to bring it up, and a lot of people don't realize in a lot of the cities and states, teachers do not pay in social security at all, they have their own retirement plan. in chicago, they don't. they have their observe retirement -- own retirement plan, health plan. they make on average in chicago -- last numbers i saw were $75,000 a year for about 170 days' work or, what is that, 30 -- figure it out, let's see, five, 30, five, 36 weeks, something like that, work -- weeks of work in the education system. they have $75,000, a very good retirement, very good health care benefits. by the way, there's a myth, a kennard, that people do not want to go into teaching. that is wrong. there are a lot of people who want to go into teaching. do you know that something like 16 percent of the harvard graduates in the last two years have applied for something called teach for america, which is this wonderful program which encourages graduates

liberal -- libbal arts for teach, 80 percent at princeton, 20 percent at university of north carolina, they want to go into teaching. the notion that we better do something because people don't want to go in is wrong. make the conditions better, encourage excellence, reward good teaching and you will have more people going in but yeah i see the caller's point. host: dennis van roekel said in the first five years, 42 percent of public school teachers leave the classroom. guest: well, that's right. it's interesting, in the teach for america program, which is just one track where you get the liberal arts majors, i think a higher percentage stay, i'm pretty sure of those numbers, but people go in and they find it to be a pretty discouraging environment. they may find it discouraging for a lot of reasons. one of the reasons that people i know have left teaching is that there are better opportunities elsewhere for promotion if you are doing a good job. good excellence is recognized

and rewarded. it still is not. look, you had the situation in d.c., and let me just say, washington, d.c. scores are lower than chicago's, so we're not bragging here, about this city, where it was possible for teachers to make i think 110, $120,000 a year, but they had to accept a pretty rigorous system of evaluation, and they wouldn't do it, they voted it down. that's why the former chancellor, michelle rhee, left washington. host: paul, joining us from new york city with bill bennett, good morning. caller: can you hear me? host: sure can. caller: i want to say first of all i agree with mr. bennett on education, i think it's great he mentions the length of time teachers are actually working, but i want to ask him a question, basically two questions. one is why does america spend more on education than any other economically developed country, at least of the vast -- at least the vast majority and get less, and why do we spend so much on health care as a percentage of gdp and

everything else and get so much less. guest: i don't think we get less for health care. it's the best health care in the world. now it may not be. the obama care system may wreck or system. the burdens imposed on doctors and hospitals i think will be too great. the thrust of the question is about education. we spend a lot of money because we spend a lot of money on a lot of things. i was talking to the assistant, mr. van roekel, head of the national education system, outside as we were listening, and it's very interesting that the whole thrust of the education debate now is how teachers need more, how the schools need more. we have been giving more money to the schools. not the last two years, because of what's happening in the economy. but consistently, if you look at the curve, you will see

education spending up, up, up, performance is flat. we have given more, spent more, spent more and gotten a flat result, no improvement in our system, because it doesn't have accountability. it does not have accountability. >> -- host: should there be a department of education? guest: there will be for the foreseeable future. you remember i was held hostage for a while, a liberal told ronald reagan he would not confirm me as secretary of education unless ronald reagan sent him a letter saying he wouldn't abolish the department and i told the president, you do what you want, you're the president and i can do something else if you abolish the department. he didn't have the votes then, ronald reagan, in his second term. if he didn't have them then, you won't need them now. you don't need a department of education, you need some federal responsibility in education but it could be minimal. when i was secretary, we did a poll, a survey, of all our grant recipients and we them to evaluate the program, the program that got the best

grades, the bloc grant to the states. we take the money, we take our cut out, and send it back to them. that's the program they felt was the best. people said why did you take it in the first place, why don't you leave it there. host: from virginia, good morning. caller: good morning. i'm just sitting here amazed and outraged by the assertions that the former secretary is making. blaming the obama administration for the mass in the middle east because of obama's policy. as i recall, one year ago condoleezza rice and members of the bush administration were tripping over one another to claim that they were the ones responsible for the arab uprising, they were the ones who planted the seeds of democracy by starting these wars in a iraq that cost so much in terms of life and money.

the other assertion that the obama health care plan is going to ruin our system -- national geographic two years ago had a comparison of the cost expended per capita by various european nations. portugal spent $2,500 per person per year on health care and was better off in terms of mortality and the united states, paying over three times more. guest: i do not believe it. when you see the flow in the different direction, i will believe it. when you see more americans going to europe for health care rather than europeans coming here for health care, then i will buy the european system or at least part of that argument. in terms of the so-called arab spring, the president, when he went to cairo, said he hoped that based on mutual respect would have much better relations. we do not have much better

relations. say what he wanted that the bush administration -- i agree that the war in iraq was the right thing to do. i'm worried we will lose ground there. barack obama has improved people's views of the united states, but the situation in iran is very tense. i happen to think the israelis will strike. i think they may do it before the election. i have no inside information, but that is my guess. the notion that you could put forward an olive leaf that would be reciprocated by people there is not the case. we wondered what would happen in egypt. we have the muslim brotherhood. why are people not outraged? the flag of the united states was taken down, and al qaeda flag was put up in its place. in 20 countries, people want to kill americans. our ambassador was killed.

a symbol of the united states. and we are asked about it, our response is, well, this bozo in california should not have made the movie. that is insufficient for the world's greatest superpower. the response was insufficient and week. i disagree with the caller. host: the "new york post" -- they say -- have the quote, it is a terrible course for them. next to that, president obama -- governor romney seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim . guest: you expect the president to shoot back at mid romney, but i think that romney has exposed a real weakness. we are under an illusion that the way we accept them as the new savior, everybody expects that -- these radical people who

hate us, hate everything we stand for, they would somehow turn their swords into plowshares. they have not done that, and that is clear. we ask our ambassadors -- closing down consulates in sudan tunisian. this is not a good sign. this is not a great beginning. not a signal. host: john has this point -- what positive contribution did you make as secretary of education? guest: people tell me, and i did this even from some democrats, that we raise the bar in terms of pyrex -- education, which is something i was trying to do. i was not trying to transform the system. that is not the job. the secretary of education's job is a bully pulpit to raise issues that need to be talked about. content, choice, and character. that was in the mid-1980s.

i am still very proud of those. now we are having a big discussion about content, an agreement about content, the score standards that are being talked about all across the country. choice remains critical -- that is one way you can get accountability. we have arguably the world's best system of higher education, but enormously wasteful and expensive. character -- there is a new book out which talks about the importance of character and the virtues in succeeding in education. i am very pleased with that. that is the legacy of wanted to leave. host: an issue we talked about in the last hour -- parents struggling as college costs exposed -- explode. filip that the inflation rate over the last 12 years. back in 2009, inflation was

essentially nonexistent, and yet four-year private colleges went up 4%, 7% at public institutions. last year they would of 4.5%. you see the significant increase. private schools up 8.3%. this cover story -- is college a lousy investment? guest: i'm writing a book about this -- is college worth it? it is amazing. one of the things i am reminded of is how old i am. the chicago public schools article quotes me from 1986, and now i am quoted in the context of higher education for something i said in 1988. if you provide more student aid from the federal government to colleges and universities they will raise tuition. if you put more money into the

system to help students, colleges and universities will raise tuition. students will not in a closer. this is exactly what they did. host: these are students with their debt. hundred thousand dollars, 75,000 bars. guest: one student who majored in sociology, graduated, had 100,000 doris of debt. she is waitressing. putting off getting married, having kids. for a lot of people, it does not make sense to go to college. it depends on where you go, what the study, what the job market is like. however, americans believe this is a sacred and wonderful thing. i understand parents want more than anything to send their kids to college, will put any number of members of the family to work. colleges remain, however, venal

in this regard. they won all the money they can possibly get. there are very few institutions -- a few institutions who are responsible. they're very conscientious -- is still a reasonable tuition. but the reckoning may be coming for colleges and universities. the price and the results are now coming home to people. how much they owe, what are they getting? host: dennis is on the phone from florida. caller: depending on how good your memory is, you may know me from calling it to your radio show. a great show, by the way. mr. secretary, i have a couple of questions for you as one catholic to another. with so much at stake in the upcoming election in november, for the catholic church, the institutional church, the members in a -- does it seem to you that the catholic church and

clergy are doing shockingly little in the way of preaching to the issues? guest: yes. caller: no. 2, when you keep in mind as a catholic that obama is pro-abortion, pro-homosexual agenda and infringing on the freedom of religion, can a catholic vote for obama and still be a catholic? guest: will leave that to rome. put it this way -- my parish is the same as chris matthews and teddy kennedy. that would suggest to you that the catholic church has a i.n.d. crisis or one of us is in heresy. but anyway, you raise very serious issues on this issue of obamacare, the whole context here. it raises a very serious question about church-state relations and the independence of the churches under the first amendment. let me be connecting the two

strands of a conversation -- i think the reason that the philosophy of barack obama and the person of barack obama are ahead in this country is because of our educational system. i think that what republicans believe about individual responsibility, self-reliance, that this is the last best hope of earth, is not as boldly believed as it used to be. there was a survey done not long ago asking what system was superior, socialism or capitalism. i think capitalism at debt socialism by three points. -- edged out socialism by three points. why would they believe that? they are not taught otherwise. plato said the two most important questions are who gets to teach the children and what do they teach them. you are now seeing in adulthood several generations of people race in our schools to think that america is largely a suspect country, an exporter, an

injury list price, really unbalanced, not a -- and in a curious place, really unbalanced. this is not true. we have our shortcomings, but in the long history of human misery the american achievement is high. most americans do not know that. as a result, they are not appalled by things that they see our president saying and notions that america is in decline. they say, a lot of countries are in decline. we are now more in exception than any others. we think of ourselves as exceptional -- so other countries, says the president. there is a way he does not appreciate the uniqueness of america and the american story. but one way in which he does was the best thing he ever said, that was the night he won the election. he said, this could not have happened in any other country. he is right about that and needs to broaden his appreciation. our conversation host: with --

host: our conversation with bill bennett. among the books, "the children's book of virtues," "readings on the path of manhood," and now working on your third -- 23 barack. -- 23rd book. guest: it will be out in may. caller: i was just amazed at mr. bennett and his wonderful remarks about our president. this lovely catholic man -- they want to have our country run by catholics. but not everybody in our country is catholic. this country was started as a reason for people to have the choice about their own religion , not to issue certain religions

to make our laws by. guest: the caller is right about the abuses in the church. they were horrible. i remember i wrote an editorial in "the wall street journal" calling on an old friend and my a -- of mine, the cardinal in boston, to step down. it was very hard to do, but we had -- it had to be done. these were terrible scandals. nobody suggests the country should be run out of rome. i think we settled that with the election of john kennedy. i agree with the caller. the state government should not be interfering with religious liberties and setting test for what constitutes a proper behavior for religious institutions. host: our next call from illinois -- independent line. caller: good morning. i should generalize my comments because there are too many he is making that are inaccurate. he is too smart, with a ph.d.,

to be stealing stuff a teacher is doing this and that. i am a retired police officer. my brother is a retired teacher. we do not pay into social security and do not get social security. you know that. secondly, you must be conflicted with the kinds of things that you say about wars not ever having served. i was active duty three years army. it is unfortunate. it is easy for people to say what teachers should do when we have a congress that has a 10% approval rating. nothing gets done. yet we want to step on teachers and make it sound as if they have all the responsibility to make sure our kids grow up. guest: i did not say that -- when we started talking about chicago, i said that a lot of the material chicago public schools deals with is not the best. a lot of the kids to come are not ready. you have to do your best buy

them. i am not beating up on teachers, although i would encourage for teachers to get out of the business. the evidence is clear how much harm poor teachers do. the study is available from the milken foundation. a child who is the 50 percentile level, two years later with a good teacher is 80th. with a poor teacher, two years later is in the 20th. host: talk about inner-city schools, the poverty rate, the crime rate, the number of single-parent households. these are societal issues, not educational issues. how do we as a society deal with that? guest: there is a movie called "waiting for superman." it seems that a number of people, a large number of people want to do better by their children. they are not sure quite how to do it. they go to these lotteries, they

do whatever they can. they falsify their addresses to say that they live a certain place of a child can go to a better school. we still have the d.c. opportunity starship program, a great program, where kids can go to school. i was debating chris matthews -- i think we disagree on everything. except the trinity. but he said one of the most remarkable stories and america is the success of the catholic school, the inner-city catholic school with minority populations. that is true. that is demonstrable. but there are also public schools that work with the inner city population, work well and effectively. the problem with the system is that we do not differentiate and do not encourage more schools to be like the good schools. it is not you cannot educate these kids. these kids offer a challenge. my wife works in the inner city. she works with kids from

washington d.c. in her program. you can bring them along just fine. they take extra work and extra effort, and maybe people should get extra pay for that. i have no problem with that. but when we learn to do it right, we do not try to generalize it through the system. we continue to that poor teachers what -- do what they do and good teachers do what they do. the system ought to be more rational than it is. my point -- i would go to 600 schools over my career and pay honor to teachers -- i would not do that if i did not believe in teachers. host: from our viewers -- as long as parents believe is entirely the public education system responsible for teaching the kids, feeding them, providing them with the basic foundation of life, that used to be the parent's responsibility, schools will fail. lack of parental responsibility is causing the problem. guest: not too far from simi

valley, when i was secretary of education, i went to a school in orange county with primarily students of immigrants and southeast asia to address a parents group. they said that two weeks hence there is a math test, but none of the parents will be at work -- they will all be at home working with kids for the math test. cancel the secretary of education, our kids have a math test. that is the point. not every teacher is a parent, but every parent is a teacher, the child's most important and virtually indispensable teacher. host: a question from a viewer -- what do you do with children whose parents are addicts or homeless? guest: a great thinker gave a speech at the american enterprise institute years ago. he said, we need to think about more orphanages, places where

kids can go where they can be healed. when you are in a home with a drug addict, things are not good. you may well go the same way unless you are arrested. i believe in parents having every right to choose the education for their child, but when a parent is incompetent, criminal, drug-addicted -- society has to intervene. i went. b oys -- i went to boys town as secretary of education. you can see these kids have been through a lot. then they speak -- the voice of angels. what they do at these places is transform these children. i went into a crackhouse on-site child in a corner with a flashlight trying to do his homework. i am a family values guy. i am a conservative. get that child out of there --

to get them somewhere where they can live and breed. host: jerry is on the phone from indiana, republican line. caller: good morning. yes. i feel we should and the drug war. is ruining this country. ruining our people's lives. we have more people locked up in this country than any other country in the world, and at least 70% are nonviolent drug offenders. host: how you and the drug war? what is your solution? caller: ron paul or gary johnson. guest: gary johnson is a serious man with serious proposals. i think they are wrongheaded. we could do this some other time. one interesting statistic -- we now have more death and serious health problems related to

addiction to legal drugs legaloxycotin then illegal drugs. people say, not just legalize drugs. you have very serious problems with illegal drugs right now. legalization is not the answer. the marijuana out there now -- more kids are in treatment for marijuana than anything else. is very potent. in the context of education, you want to educate the last -- next generation. the last thing you want them to do is to get buzzed a couple of times a week. host: other nations provide highly subsidized secondary education. how do we call us of the greatest nation on earth when a citizens cannot afford the base -- basic rights other countries enjoy? guest: we spend a lot of money on education. it is highly subsidized, just not highly effective. i think we spend enough. $700 billion -- we just do not do it right.

host: from sioux falls, south dakota. caller: a couple of things. he was right in the fact that he said he is a right-winger. that is for sure. the other thing, not only do we not want our country run from rome, also not from israel. netanyahu. i thought it was almost x -- for to ttreasonous anybody to back the president of israel over our president. for romney to come at a crucial crisis in the middle east and basically -- what you went to college, -- call it, obstruct. what i want to say, the comments he made about the handling of

the situation. guest: i do not want a country run from a rome or israel or chicago. it may be the chicago style. i am more in the spirit of wisconsin. those places where my friend paul ryan is from. but also parts of new york city. places where i grew up, in brooklyn. look -- the debate about foreign policy is about a lot of different things. one thing for sure, iran is a menace, and if they get this nuclear capability, they have told us they will use them. they have to be stopped. they show not much sign of stopping it. an editorial the other day, what constitutes a red line for benjamin netanyahu? we need to agree on what that red line is. israel has a right to defend itself.

the question is, it it does act, will the united states behind them? i sure as heck hope so. host: benjamin netanyahu on the sunday morning program that we heard on c-span radio at noon eastern -- our last call is john from georgia, independent line. caller: let israel go ahead and attack iran. if they got nuclear-weapons, they would not do anything. they know they'll be blown off the map. they are not trying to commit suicide. you talk like to know all about it -- you have never been to war. you never even went to the military. you need to stop talking like you are a great authority on things. guest: i am just giving my opinion. i did not serve in the military. that is one of my regrets. our younger son is a second lieutenant in the marine corps. i have seen in the game, so to speak.

i take these issues seriously. i do not take them as trifles. they are the most important things -- the commitment of u.s. troops into military action is the most serious act a president can engage in. i think we ought to have a more thoughtful policy than we do. it does not mean we do not commit our troops. sometimes we have to. in this world we either get strong now, the old commercials is pay now or pay later. i think we get strong now or the odds will get worse against us. host: wended paul ryan let you know he was seriously being considered for vice president? how has the conversation been since he was nominated? guest: the stage at the values voters summit on saturday -- paul ryan called his mother at 11:00 that friday night and appeared on saturday morning. he texted me that morning at 8:00, called me and i missed the

gang called. -- dang call. pick up the front. but he left me a message. it was a warm and friendly message. d back and forth in a variety of things. i have given him advice, most of which he has not taken, but he is mostly right. when he tells you what to do, do the opposite -- he is always wrong applied to a vice. he said, now this is what you should do, do the opposite. he said, you should probably be -- to the opposite of what 40. -- what i told you. he and i have kept in touch. he went past the books, got out his handkerchief, was trying to get this much of.

that is priceless now. host: let me go back to this piece -- in france where mitt romney is in the -- the campaign. he says, is time for ron to make his case. judging from the evidence available, voters are not ready yet. he makes the point that there are a smaller number of truly undecided voters for mitt romney to peel off. guest: i think people are being very casual with the pollsters. i think there are more undecided people. we shall see. this has been a very tough campaign. more to come. do not two out of this thing. do not count this over into november. what does abate. they will be very interesting to read i thought it ron need a very good job. -- mitt romney did a very good job. barack obama is not used to the format. he did not go through a primary like mitt romney. we shall see.

it is uphill, i wish it were not. i wish to attend points ahead, but we are not. host: former education secretary, author of his 23rd book next year. talk-show host. thank you very much. will you come back on the tv? [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> tomorrow on "washington journal," jonathan allen looks at what is ahead for congress this week. bob woodward talks about his new book, "the price of politics." and a guest from the pew health group discusses the new nutritional and -- dietary guidelines for public schools. "washington journal, live on c- span. >> we can keep investing in wind and solar and clean coal and our farmers and scientists can harvest the biofuels. our construction workers can build homes and factories that

waste less energy. put them back to work. >> i'll take it vantage of our coal, our gas, our nuclear, are renewable. we will be energy independent in eight years. >> watch and engage with c-span as the presidential campaigns move toward the october debate. energy policy is likely one of the topics in the first 90 minute debate, wednesday the third. audience questions take center stage in a town hall format tuesday the 16th. foreign policy is the focus of the final debate, the 22nd. also what the vice presidential candidates' debate on thursday, the 11th. through election day, coverage of key house and senate races, looking at the control of congress. follow our coverage on c-span, c-span radio, and online at c- span.org. >> in less than three weeks, the first of the presidential debates, live on c-span, c-span